Schneider v. Coe’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
1 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 2020
1 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Wisconsin v. Yoder · 3 Cal. 3d 914 - Gibson v. Gibson · Gelbman v. Gelbman · Holodook v. Spencer · Williams v. Williams
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the freedom of exercise . . . (parental control, authority and discretion) has constitutional underpinning and contrasts sharply with the State's supervision and regulation of the judgment one must exercise while driving an automobile.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]e are of the opinion that an absolute rule of parental immunity in tort has no rational basis under modem day conditions and circumstances, especially [with] the prevalence of liability insurance. We hold, therefore, with an ever-increasing number of jurisdictions, that in an action for negligence arising from an automobile accident, brought on behalf of an unemancipated minor child against a parent, the doctrine of parental immunity is not applicable to the extent of the parent’s automobile liability insurance coverage; but that, otherwise, the doctrine is applicable in such case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Reciprocal rights and duties inhere in the parent-child relationship. Anything creating conflict between parent and child, or interfering with the authority, discretion, or control that a parent has the right to exercise in supervising his child is repugnant to the institution of the family, and therefore is against public policy. Paren tal immunity will not be abrogated where the duty arises from the family relationship, for to do so would manifestly tend to disturb domestic tranquility.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.